Table REF  shows the results of 3 different tests, the \(Q_{DMAP}\)  for the data sets \(\mathcal {DH}\,\) , \(\mathcal {DS}\,\) , and \(\mathcal {DHS}\,\) , all compared to \(\mathcal {D}\,\) . Beginning with the first row, we see that within \(\Lambda {\rm CDM}\)  the prediction for \(S_8\)  from the fit to \(\mathcal {D}\,\) is in moderate \(2.6\sigma \)  tension with the direct measurements. Much more significant at \(5.6\sigma \)  is the Hubble tension, the tension with the direct measurement from SH0ES.This value is even larger than the \(5\sigma \)  tension obtained for \(H_0\)  in [1]}. This is because we quantify the tension with the supernova magnitude \(M_b\)  instead of \(H_0\)  which avoids the model dependence included in the systematic uncertainties of \(H_0\)  from [1]}. The tension with both direct measurements combined is \(5.8\sigma \) , and clearly \(\Lambda {\rm CDM}\)  cannot explain the combined \(H_0/S_8\)  tension.This is slightly smaller than the combination (in quadrature) of the \(Q_{DMAP}\)  tensions for \(\mathcal {DH}\,\) and \(\mathcal {DS}\,\) . This is due to the correlation of \(S_8\)  and \(H_0\)  visible in the \(\Lambda {\rm CDM}\)  panel of Figure REF .
<TABLE>